Regarding the teambuilding section for M-B analyses, I noticed that some writers opt to preface bullet points with header names for their set analyses, while others don't. A clear example of this is Garchomp; the Life Orb "Fast Attacker" set sticks with the basic "Checks and Weaknesses" and "Good Partners and Synergies" headers for its Teambuilding section, while the bulky set has a header for nearly every bullet point under Teambuilding. I'm concerned that this would make the writing structure too inconsistent if this keeps going forward for future regulations, and it also makes it a little harder for readers to distinguish when the set analysis transitions from talking about a Pokemon's checks to discussing its synergies with other Pokemon.
That's why I think it might be wise to revise the Teambuilding portion of the analysis skeleton for the upcoming Regulation M-C format. My idea would be to remove the Teambuilding header altogether and instead split that section into two, with headers labeled "Checks and Weaknesses" and "Good Partners and Synergies," like so:
I think doing something like this should make it clearer to readers on what the writer is talking about while still giving the writer agency on customizing the analysis to a specific Pokemon with the bullet point header names.
That's why I think it might be wise to revise the Teambuilding portion of the analysis skeleton for the upcoming Regulation M-C format. My idea would be to remove the Teambuilding header altogether and instead split that section into two, with headers labeled "Checks and Weaknesses" and "Good Partners and Synergies," like so:
SP Spreads
========
* **13 HP / 32 Atk / 21 Spe with Adamant**: If a Pokemon has a rather non obvious stat point spread, explaining it is generally worth it!
* **32 HP / 32 Atk / 2 Spe with Adamant**: Generally, only list 32 / 32 / 2 spreads if the Pokemon has multiple EV builds. Otherwise, those tend to be pretty obvious, and don't need any writing at all!
Checks and Weaknesses
========
* **Use multiple bullet points!**: Break this section up into multiple bullet points, try not to make each point too long
Good Partners and Synergies
========
* **Use multiple bullet points!**: Break this section up into multiple bullet points, try not to make each point too long
========
* **13 HP / 32 Atk / 21 Spe with Adamant**: If a Pokemon has a rather non obvious stat point spread, explaining it is generally worth it!
* **32 HP / 32 Atk / 2 Spe with Adamant**: Generally, only list 32 / 32 / 2 spreads if the Pokemon has multiple EV builds. Otherwise, those tend to be pretty obvious, and don't need any writing at all!
Checks and Weaknesses
========
* **Use multiple bullet points!**: Break this section up into multiple bullet points, try not to make each point too long
Good Partners and Synergies
========
* **Use multiple bullet points!**: Break this section up into multiple bullet points, try not to make each point too long
Checks and Weaknesses
========
* **Ice-types**: Mega Salamence's 4x weakness to Ice leaves it vulnerable to being OHKOed by Ice-types like Mega Froslass.
Good Partners and Synergies
========
* **Steel-types**: Kingambit is an excellent ally to Mega Salamence, as it can threaten an OHKO against Mega Froslass with Sucker Punch before it can attack Salamence with Blizzard.
========
* **Ice-types**: Mega Salamence's 4x weakness to Ice leaves it vulnerable to being OHKOed by Ice-types like Mega Froslass.
Good Partners and Synergies
========
* **Steel-types**: Kingambit is an excellent ally to Mega Salamence, as it can threaten an OHKO against Mega Froslass with Sucker Punch before it can attack Salamence with Blizzard.
I think doing something like this should make it clearer to readers on what the writer is talking about while still giving the writer agency on customizing the analysis to a specific Pokemon with the bullet point header names.
Last edited:
